Trackback: FEMA (Fucked up Emergency Management Agency) Tracked on: Mike's Blog (66.151.149.25) at 2005 09 01 21:59:33
(among other things to rant about) If you go to FEMA's home page and search for where to donate money to help the victims of hurricane Katrina, the 3rd organization listed is a terrorist organization and hate group that has advocated the assassination of Venezuela’s democratically elected president. What the fuck is it with BushCo and the right wing nut jobs?from AmericaBlog...Well, guess Pat Robertson is a bit closer to the Bush administration than they're

Trackback: "A national disgrace" Tracked on: Rhosgobel: Radagast's Home (72.9.234.70) at 2005 09 02 02:09:57
The lack of planning for and lack of quick response to hurricane Katrina is beyond belief; the title (a statement by the head of New Orleans' emergency operations discussing FEMA's lack of assistance; link) says it all. Pharyngula links to one of man...

Trackback: Ms sobre Nueva Orleans: diques, saqueos, George Bush Tracked on: Las penas del Agente Smith (66.162.134.137) at 2005 09 03 05:52:45
Est la cosa que arde con Nueva Orleans tras el paso del Katrina. No slo en los medios tradicionales sino en la blogosfera (Technorati: New Orleans, Technorati: Katrina) e incluso en Flickr, donde estn apareciendo las imgenes de muertos flotando en...

#38897: Chris Clarke — 09/05  at  05:02 PM
There's those crack investigative journalistic instincts at work again.


Be fair, Raven. Remember: business reporter. Which is to journalism as car wash worker is to mechanic.

#38899: Raven — 09/05  at  05:06 PM
Very true, Chris--as long as there's a Chik-Fil-A opening to be covered somewhere on Maui, Harry will always have a job.

#38913: ekzept — 09/05  at  06:04 PM

But if we limit it to: what was done by federal policy in the week or so before the storm reached the Gulf Coast, then we're talking.

i agree with a lot of what you say, Harry. but from what i have seen, there is concrete evidence BushCo did a lot to confound what FEMA was supposed to do when. in that respect, and consistent with what i've written here, that is squarely BushCo's thing. sp i concur with Raven and PZ, too.

i agree that it looks like the locals didn't do it right, didn't act fast enough, and so on. but, to take your quote and sense above, Katrina turned Category 5 over the Gulf of Mexico, and i'm not sure the locals could react faster. if the federal couldn't act fast enough either, well, that's an important point. we need to know that if they couldn't, and change things so they can.

the essence of emergency management is no different than military command and control. once events enter the "emergency" or "possible emergency" condition, communications systems and a clear chain-of-command need to be established. everyone needs to know who makes the call, and there cannot be any question of following the order. it may come out poorer for some portion of the population. in urgent circumstances, alas, the good of the many is primary.

i think the greatest failure here may not be the flood control system but, rather, how in the time it's been and being established DHS-FEMA did not have this figured out. it is, from my perspective, a weakness of the Republican model that ideologically they delegate to states and localities. even if one assigns responsibilities for the people of New Orleans and area to its local authorities, the federal ought to have an eye on the national and regional picture, and the particular implications of a catastrophe to a city or region for that.

it looks like we may squeak through this one, in no small measure to deliberate economic decisions made by our international partners, notably regarding energy supplies. but that in itself says a lot.

i think local and state authorities by definition cannot possibly appreciate the big picture, as well as lacking knowledge, resources, and other stuff, and they have no incentive to gain these. if a Category 5 were heading for New Orleans, my recommendation to the President would be to declare martial law and begin moving troops into the area ahead of time, to assist in evacuation and whatever else. oh, and also to wrest political control away from the state and local authorities.

i mean, look, the primary Soviet nuclear target on the east coast during Cold War times was Philadelphia in winter, both because of its connection with United States history and because its the loading point for all of the heating oil for the eastern United States. either there never was a plan to deal with that kind of disruption, or, in the celebration over the end of the Cold War (of which there always has been a dearth of on the Republican side), those plans have been lost.

one feature of a super-warm Carribean and Gulf of Mexico, i'm afraid, is that storms may well "pop up" like this, from Category 3 to 5 like Katrina did, or, as the forecasters are now worrying, a tropical depression may form over Bermuda and become a hurricane. since when has that happened? tune in next week ... .

#38915: ekzept — 09/05  at  06:20 PM
okay, let's try that again, making it more coherent... serves me write for trying to hold a conversation while writing this stuff.

But if we limit it to: what was done by federal policy in the week or so before the storm reached the Gulf Coast, then we're talking.

i agree with a lot of what you say, Harry. but from what i have seen, there is concrete evidence BushCo did a lot to confound what FEMA was supposed to do when. in that respect, and consistent with what i've written here, that is squarely BushCo's thing. so, i concur with Raven and PZ, too. (talk about having each leg on either side of an ever widening chasm...)

i agree that it looks like the locals didn't do it right, didn't act fast enough, and so on. note, Katrina turned Category 5 over the Gulf of Mexico. i'm not sure the locals could react faster. if the federal couldn't act fast enough either, well, that's an important point. we need to know that if they couldn't, and change things so they can. i fear political damage control and telling people to keep their mouths shut may keep that information from us. (why coverups are more dangerous than the primary crime.)

the essence of emergency management is no different than military command and control. once events enter the "emergency" or "possible emergency" condition, communications systems and a clear chain-of-command need to be established. these need to be prepared and agreed upon ahead of time. some of that is infrastructure, some of that is playbook. everyone needs to know who makes the call. d there can't be any question of following the order, lest the outcome deviate from script or as close to it as possible. there is no time to plan on the fly. it may come out poorer for some portion of the population. in urgent circumstances, alas, the good of the many is primary.

i think the greatest failure here may be the failure to establish such DHS-FEMA sovereignty and plan, not the flood control system. i still believe investing in such infrastructures against natural disasters is the better way but, if the plan is to cut and run, it better be
good. a weakness of the Republican model is that ideologically they delegate to states and localities. even if one assigns responsibilities for the people of New Orleans and area to its local authorities, the federal ought to have an eye on the national and regional picture, and the particular implications of a catastrophe to a city or region.

i think local and state authorities by definition cannot possibly appreciate the big picture, as well as lacking knowledge, resources, and other stuff, and they have no incentive to gain these. if a Category 5 were heading for New Orleans, my recommendation to the President would be to declare martial law and begin moving troops into the area ahead of time, to assist in evacuation and whatever else. oh, and also to wrest political control away from the state and local authorities, at gunpoint if necessary.

i mean, look, the primary Soviet nuclear target on the east coast during Cold War times was Philadelphia in winter. this was because of the false perception the Soviets had of its importance in United States history and because it is the loading point for most heating oil for the eastern United States. either there never was a plan to deal with that kind of disruption, or, in the celebration over the end of the Cold War, those plans have been lost. i've not seen evidence the Republicans ever celebrated the end of the Cold War. indeed, many seem to still be fighting it, under different guises.

it looks like we may squeak through this one, in no small measure to deliberate economic decisions made by our international partners, notably regarding energy supplies. that says a lot.

one feature of a super-warm Carribean and Gulf of Mexico, i'm afraid, is that storms may well "pop up" like this, from Category 3 to 5 like Katrina did, or, as the forecasters are now worrying, a tropical depression may form over Bermuda and become a hurricane ("Hello boys! I'm back!"). since when has that happened? tune in next week ... .

#38929: Raven — 09/05  at  07:04 PM
Ah, ekzept, I think I see your problem. You're still trying to have a rational discussion with Harry.

The thing is, when one party has proven himself willing to lie repeatedly and to put Nazi rhetoric in someone else's mouth, you're long past the point where rational discussion with that party was possible.

Allow me to help out:

Harry, since your reading comprehension is so poor, let me clarify my earlier remarks for you: when I referred to your "crack journalistic instincts", I meant that you are obviously smoking crack.

See, ekzept--that's the level of discourse Harry trolls for, and he's very disappointed when he doesn't get it. He brags how he's so obnoxious that even the wingnut sites can't stand him, and he lies here repeatedly, even when called on it. Clearly something went badly wrong with his toilet-training, but it's much too late to fix that now.

It's really the kindest thing you can do, to go ahead and give him the kind of negative attention he craves. As long as you try to have a rational conversation, he's just going to keep up his lying until he gets what he wants.

#42618: — 10/03  at  11:10 PM
I've been traveling in realms without the Internet for a month, but things have developed.

The New York Times, if you can believe that rightwing rag, says the Industrial Canal floodwall failed because it was too high, not too low.

I'll take Raven's apology now.

#42620: ekzept — 10/03  at  11:40 PM
more. it's complicated.

#42622: Raven — 10/04  at  03:51 AM

The New York Times, if you can believe that rightwing rag, says the Industrial Canal floodwall failed because it was too high, not too low.

I thought your argument was that the Bush administration was off the hook for insufficient funding because it didn't fail. Now you're arguing that thay're off the hook because it did. That's what happens when you argue from an evidence-free point of view--everything bolsters your point of view, whether or not your overall argument is internally consistent.

If you start from the conclusion that everything justifies the spending on the war in Iraq and work backwards, Harry's flip-flop makes--well, not sense, exactly, but you can see why he needs to do it.

I'll take Raven's apology now.

I'm sorry that you're an evidence-free racist right-wing war apologist troll, Harry.

#42657: — 10/04  at  09:16 AM
ekzept: Thanks for the link but things are yet unclear. We shall have to wait for the final report (There is an investigation going on, isn't it?).

#42658: — 10/04  at  09:16 AM
ekzept: Thanks for the link but things are yet unclear. We shall have to wait for the final report (There is an investigation going on, isn't it?).

#42669: — 10/04  at  10:17 AM
Yes, we will need a thorough analysis, but that doesn't mean we don't know anything.

Besides, we already know that Professor Myers's kneejerk antiBush accusation (joined in enthusiastically by Raven et al) cannot be correct.

We know: 1. The wall held the head of water it was designed to hold. 2. It was subjected to a much higher head than that. (Apparently, at least five feet higher, not counting wave action, and maybe quite a bit more than that.)

Raven appears not to understand anything at all about engineering. There are design failures -- when a structure does not meet its design goals; and ultimate failures -- when a structure is stressed beyond what it was intended to do.

The failure here was the second type. Since I've already pointed out the difference, it is absurd for Raven to maintain his same confusion.

3. It was a wall not a levee. I was ridiculed for maintaining that the difference means something. jaimito's link tends to support my position. No levees broke this time, either. The Times said this was somewhat of a surprise, though it does not say why it should have been.

4. To the extent that it was a partisan wall, it was a Democratic one. Who do you think was in office in the '60s?

5. Since Raven is so hot on evidence, where is the evidence that Iraq spending had anything at all to do with the conditions of levees and floodwalls built a generation ago?

(Not to mention that, by his logic, no money should have been spent in New York after Sept. 11 because it should have been spent in New Orleans.)

#42670: Raven — 10/04  at  10:24 AM

Raven...his...his...

Still taking a pass on that whole "reading for comprehension" thing, Harry?

#42698: — 10/04  at  01:15 PM
Pls let me quote something from ekzept's link:

I would not be surprised at the discovery that the pilings were only driven a few feet into the ground ... Of course you bill the government for the full number of pilings, take the savings and run to the bank, not to mention sharing some of the booty with members of the Orleans Parish Levee Board and the inspectors from various agencies. Not saying that this is the way it was done, but as a former resident of New Orleans, (moved out in 1989) it would not surprise me. Mike Boelter at October 3, 2005.

It is shocking that this scenario is imaginable. If true, the New Orleans inundation may rank with the Lima, Peru (1989) cholera epidemy, when they stole the money for the chlorination of the drinking water.

At this point, it seems that New Orleans was flooded because of an engineering/construction failure. The investigation may lead to criminal charges.

But the botched response was clearly a political failure.

#42699: — 10/04  at  01:16 PM
Pls let me quote something from ekzept's link:

I would not be surprised at the discovery that the pilings were only driven a few feet into the ground ... Of course you bill the government for the full number of pilings, take the savings and run to the bank, not to mention sharing some of the booty with members of the Orleans Parish Levee Board and the inspectors from various agencies. Not saying that this is the way it was done, but as a former resident of New Orleans, (moved out in 1989) it would not surprise me. Mike Boelter at October 3, 2005.

It is shocking that this scenario is imaginable. If true, the New Orleans inundation may rank with the Lima 1989 cholera epidemy, when they stole the money for the chlorination of the drinking water.

At this point, it seems that New Orleans was flooded because of an engineering/construction failure. The investigation may lead to criminal charges.

But the botched response was clearly a political failure.

#42725: — 10/04  at  05:50 PM
Raven, you are the one with the comprehension problems.

Not to also mention your predilection for making stuff up. But go ahead, show your comprehension by finding statements by me to back up your slurs about the Iraq war, which I have never said I support.

#42740: Raven — 10/04  at  09:53 PM
You're right, Harry--I was so out of line making up that "Bushitler" stuff. That was totally beyond the pale of civilized discourse, and I never should have done it.

Oh, wait--that wasn't me.

Apart from putting Nazi rhetoric in my mouth, committing fundamental logical fallacies along the lines of (A implies B; B; therefore A); writing egregious ethnic and religious slurs, and demonstrating a total lack of reading comprehension that would fail you out of Journalism 101 (how many times *are* you going to insist on giving me that supernumerary penis, despite the, you know, *facts*, being pointed out to you?), plus a case of projection about all of the above that would give Freud pause, you got nothing.

You're not even an especially interesting troll, Harry, and I'm not going to waste any more time than I already have on your non-monotonic posts, which after reading I can physically feel the knowledge draining out of my body, due to their negative information content. I've got much better things to do with my time than engage with you anymore, like calling my father-in-law and telling him once again how much I appreciate him.

I will give you that much credit, Harry--every time I read anything you write, I appreciate my own father-in-law that much more. He's a decent man who would never dream of using me as his public excuse to hide behind for hateful bigoted posts about Muslims and Asians. You are constantly ramping up my appreciation of him for his character, and our relationship is that much better for it.

Let's end it on that note, Harry--I said the single nicest thing I could possibly find to say about you, and now you'll find someone else who's actually interested in playing "Feed the Troll" with you.

#42885: — 10/06  at  09:52 AM
Wow. That was as graceless a surrender as I've seen in . . .
well, in the three weeks since Brown left New Orleans.

You go, girl!